Karnataka High Court
Shaik Javeed And Ors vs The State Of Karnataka And Ors on 30 July, 2024
Author: Suraj Govindaraj
Bench: Suraj Govindaraj
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5469
WP No. 200779 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO. 200779 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR)
BETWEEN:
1. SHAIK JAVEED
S/O KHAJA MAINODDIN,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
2. SHAIK TAHER
S/O KHAJA MAINODDIN,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
3. SHAIK HAJI
S/O KHAJA MAINODDIN,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
4. SHAIK SADAK
Digitally signed by S/O KHAJA MAINODDIN,
BASALINGAPPA
SHIVARAJ AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
DHUTTARGAON OCC: AGRICULTURE,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
5. SHAIK SAJEED
S/O KHAJA MAINODDIN,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
ALL R/O. H.NO. 42/96,
GULMIRZA GALLI,
BASAVAKALYAN,
DIST: BIDAR-585327.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. ANANT S. JAHGIRDAR, ADVOCATE AND
SRI GANESH S. KALBURGI, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5469
WP No. 200779 of 2024
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH ITS PRL. SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
M.S. BUILDING,
BENGALURU-560001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BIDAR,
DIST: BIDAR-585401.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
BASAVAKALYAN,
DIST: BIDAR-585327.
4. THE TAHASILDAR
BASAVAKALYAN,
DIST: BIDAR-585327.
5. TALEEM BEGUM @ TASLEEM BEGUM
W/O LATE JALIL MIYAN,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD AND AGRICULTURE,
R/O. H.NO. 42/96,
GULMIRZA GALLI,
BASAVAKALYAN,
DIST: BIDAR-585327.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MAYA T.R. HCGP FOR R1 TO R4;
SRI SACHIN M. MAHAJAN, ADVOCATE FOR R5)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, A)
QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06.02.2024 PASSED BY
RESPONDENT NO. 2 IN FILE NO. PÀA:C¦Ã®Ä/DgÀ.¦-94/2023-24 THE
COPY OF WHICH AT ANNEXURE-E IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE. B) PASS ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION
WHICH MAY BE DEEMED FIT IN THE FACTS AND
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5469
WP No. 200779 of 2024
CIRCUMSTANCES OF CASE, IN INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
"a) Quash the impugned order dated 06.02.2024 passed by Respondent no. 2 in file No. PÀA:C¦Ã®Ä/DgÀ.¦-94/2023-24 the copy of which at annexure-e in the interest of justice.
b) Pass any other writ or order or direction which may be deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of case, in interest of justice and equity."
2. The contention of the petitioners is that during the lifetime of the father of the petitioners, the property, which is the subject matter of the present petition in Sy.No.36/2 measuring 3 acres at Partapur village, Tq: Basavakalyan was purchased by the father of the petitioners in the name of the minor son Jalil Miyan, who is husband of respondent No.5. Subsequently, -4- NC: 2024:KHC-K:5469 WP No. 200779 of 2024 the said property was sold and out of the consideration certain other properties were purchased vide sale deed dated the 26.08.1999. Subsequent to death of Jalil Miyan, the revenue entries in respect of the properties are mutated in the name of his wife respondent No.5, which came to be challenged by the petitioner before the Assistant Commissioner, Basavakalyan in a proceedings filed under section 136(2) the Karnataka Land Revenue Act 1964, which came to be dismissed vide order dated 06.02.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner at Annexure E. Challenging the said order, the petitioners are before this court.
3. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the property was not the individual property of Jalil Miyan, the late husband of respondent No.5, but was a family property. This aspect has not been considered by the Assistant Commissioner in the proper perspective, resulting in the impugned order being passed. On inquiry, he -5- NC: 2024:KHC-K:5469 WP No. 200779 of 2024 submits that there is a suit in OS No.193/2022 pending before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Basavakalyan filed by the petitioners seeking for partition of the very same property, as is the subject matter of the impugned order.
4. If that be so, the contention of the petitioners as to whether the property is individual property of Jalil Miyan or the family property, would have to be determined by the Trial Court seized of the matter. Today by way of a separate judgment, suit in OS No.193/2022 and OS No.54/2022 pending between the same parties have been directed to be clubbed vide order passed in WP No. 202299/2023. In that view of the matter, I pass the following order:
ORDER a. Writ Petition is dismissed. b. The parties would be bound by the judgment passed in OS No.193/2022, clubbed with OS No.54/2022 and any entries made in any revenue entries would -6- NC: 2024:KHC-K:5469 WP No. 200779 of 2024 be subject to the result of the said judgment in the said two suits.
Sd/-
(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE NJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56